1505557 (Migration)
Case
•
[2016] AATA 4086
•13 July 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
1505557 (Migration) [2016] AATA 4086
[2016] AATA 4086
13 July 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision by the Department of Immigration to refuse to approve a nomination for a Customer Service Manager position. The applicant sought approval for the nomination of Che-Min Chou for this role, with a stated base rate of pay of $57,000. The applicant had initially indicated that the Australian labour market had not been tested for this position.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for approving the nomination under regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal considered whether there was any adverse information known to Immigration about the applicant or a person associated with the applicant, and if so, whether it was reasonable to disregard such information, as stipulated in regulation 2.72(9).
The Tribunal found that adverse information did exist, namely that the applicant had been barred from being an approved sponsor for three months from March to June 2015. However, the Tribunal reasoned that it was reasonable to disregard this information. This conclusion was based on the fact that the bar had expired, the Department had subsequently approved the applicant as a standard business sponsor for a five-year period, and the Department had continued to grant Subclass 457 visas to applicants sponsored by the applicant since the bar ended. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered an enforceable undertaking provided by the applicant to the Fair Work Ombudsman, noting that the applicant had met its undertakings and provided audit reports confirming compliance with Commonwealth workplace laws.
Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision not to approve the nomination and substituted a decision approving the nomination.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for approving the nomination under regulation 2.72 of the Migration Regulations 1994. Specifically, the Tribunal considered whether there was any adverse information known to Immigration about the applicant or a person associated with the applicant, and if so, whether it was reasonable to disregard such information, as stipulated in regulation 2.72(9).
The Tribunal found that adverse information did exist, namely that the applicant had been barred from being an approved sponsor for three months from March to June 2015. However, the Tribunal reasoned that it was reasonable to disregard this information. This conclusion was based on the fact that the bar had expired, the Department had subsequently approved the applicant as a standard business sponsor for a five-year period, and the Department had continued to grant Subclass 457 visas to applicants sponsored by the applicant since the bar ended. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered an enforceable undertaking provided by the applicant to the Fair Work Ombudsman, noting that the applicant had met its undertakings and provided audit reports confirming compliance with Commonwealth workplace laws.
Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision not to approve the nomination and substituted a decision approving the nomination.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Immigration
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Natural Justice
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
1505557 (Migration) [2016] AATA 4086
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0